No. Senna surely hated the high tech gizmos of his era (active suspensions, ABS, TC, etc.) but I find it hard to believe he'd hate the challenge of best his competitors on driving skill (like how to drive fast while looking after your tires). You seem to forget that this was a big part of F1 racing in the 80s...
Schumacher is complaining because he can't seem to find a way to unlock their potential. He's barely scored points and his teammate scored Mercedes first win. Simple, just another year of mediocrity (for now), so why not put to spotlight on Pirelli? It's pretty sad because it makes him sound like Jarno Trulli.

Partly true, but the tires in the 80's were much more forgiving than they are now. And lasted 1/2 the race on full tanks. In addition, you could set a fastest lap in the 80's with tires at half life. Today's tire is guaranteed to be half a second off the pace by half life.

I agree schumi is whining, but I also agree we are seeing less aggressive driving because of tire degradation. You must at least concede that point.

The most intriguing portions of the race for me were the last ten laps when McLaren and Red Bull woke up and started trying to get into points. Certainly it's a far cry from last year when they were often fighting for places 1-4.

But at least this season we won't be ordaining a winner before the final race although I agree with the above comments that the tire situation is making the results far more erratic than it ought to be. Schumacher and Rosberg just sitting out Q3 to save tires is a disturbing trend. Getting pole is less important.

I wonder how many different ways McLaren can find to lose races for their drivers...

Quite true. What exactly was the story behind the demotion?

Hamilton stopped on track after his quali lap. He did something similar in Canada 2010 (?) because if he'd driven the rest of the lap, he wouldn't have had the 1 liter of fuel left in the tank for scrutineering as mandated. The FIA has since closed that loophole.

Yesterday, he had 1.3L left when he stopped, and McLaren tried to argue that there was something wrong with the car which caused them to tell Hamilton to stop on track. The FIA wasn't buying it (rightly so because problem or no, he would have been under 1L by the time he reached parc ferme), so to the back he went. I think a more appropriate punishment would have been a loss of five or ten places.

Hamilton stopped on track after his quali lap. He did something similar in Canada 2010 (?) because if he'd driven the rest of the lap, he wouldn't have had the 1 liter of fuel left in the tank for scrutineering as mandated. The FIA has since closed that loophole.
Yesterday, he had 1.3L left when he stopped, and McLaren tried to argue that there was something wrong with the car which caused them to tell Hamilton to stop on track. The FIA wasn't buying it (rightly so because problem or no, he would have been under 1L by the time he reached parc ferme), so to the back he went. I think a more appropriate punishment would have been a loss of five or ten places.

But why does it matter if he stopped the car? He had enough fuel.

McLaren need a kick in the pants, they are getting in their drivers way.

FIA requires enough fuel to get back to parc ferme AND 1L for fuel sample testing. If they don't have that rule you'll have tons of cars stopping on track post qualifying. Pretty silly mistake from McLaren.